Electrical stimulation of cardiac tissue as a therapy has been known and practiced since the 1960s. By 1967 pacemakers set a minimum heart rate and intervened to stimulate or pace the right ventricle of the heart at a fixed rate if the natural heart rate dropped below this minimum heart rate floor (WI or “demand” pacing). This treatment, originally prescribed for a slow heart rate or rhythm (bradycardia), was improved with the advent of multiple chamber devices. These so-called “dual chamber” pacing devices track the prevailing heart rate and rhythm, and intervene to treat the heart with a more physiologic pacing mode (VAT, DVI, DDD). Such devices are well suited to patients with intermittent rhythm disturbances. As a group, these well-known pacing modalities allow a more natural heart rate and rhythm to predominate over a wide range of conditions.
Other heart rhythm diseases have also been treated with more specialized devices that interact with the heart to control too-fast rhythms (tachycardia) of several differing etiologies. Antitachycardia therapeutic devices may pace the heart rapidly to interrupt potentially lethal arrhythmias. Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillators (ICD) with multiple leads and several stimulus power levels have been used to treat the lethal arrhythmias such as ventricular fibrillation, while lower power, multiple site pacing may aid patients in heart failure (bi-ventricular pacing) by re-synchronizing the right and left ventricles.
Throughout the history of pacing it has been observed that the act of stimulating the heart can have a direct and substantial impact on the blood pressure of the patient. Since the earliest days, it has been noted that ventricular pacing (WI) may result in decreased cardiac output that is often associated with low blood pressure, resulting in a condition called “Pacemaker Syndrome.” Although this term is generic to a range of mechanisms and pacemaker interactions, it is a widely held belief that some of the impetus for development of dual chamber pacing modalities derived from the effort to alleviate the pacemaker syndrome that was observed to be concomitant with the wide scale adoption of single chamber pacemakers.
It should also be noted that more recently some implanted stimulation devices have been proposed to “pace” or electrically stimulate the carotid sinus baroreceptors of a patient to control blood pressure as a way to treat hypertension.
Other device based approaches for reducing blood pressure through pacing are known. For example, device based therapies include pacemaker type stimulators for non-cardiac structures for treating hypertension as taught by U.S. Pat. No. 6,073,048 to Kieval which discloses a device that delivers stimulation to arterial baroreceptors to lower systemic blood pressure indirectly through neurogenically mediated pathways.
Pacemakers that incorporate pressure sensors are known from U.S. Pat. No. 6,522,926 to Kieval which shows a pacemaker for optimizing the AV delay interval of a patient's heart to increase cardiac output.